Intelligence officials push back at 'disparagement'

Senate panel examines conclusion that Russia hacked Democrats

By Dan Freedman

Published
12:04 am EST, Friday, January 6, 2017

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), second left, the committee chair, speaks with Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on foreign cybersecurity threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 5, 2017. McCain has called for a select committee to investigate Russian interference in the election. At right is Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) (Stephen Crowley/The New York Times) less

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), second left, the committee chair, speaks with Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on foreign cybersecurity threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, ... more

Photo: STEPHEN CROWLEY

Photo: STEPHEN CROWLEY

Image
1of/9

Caption

Close

Image 1 of 9

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), second left, the committee chair, speaks with Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on foreign cybersecurity threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 5, 2017. McCain has called for a select committee to investigate Russian interference in the election. At right is Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) (Stephen Crowley/The New York Times) less

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), second left, the committee chair, speaks with Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on foreign cybersecurity threats, on Capitol Hill in Washington, ... more

Photo: STEPHEN CROWLEY

Intelligence officials push back at 'disparagement'

1 / 9

Back to Gallery

Washington

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told a Senate panel Thursday that while the CIA and other elements of U.S. intelligence are more certain than ever about Russian hacking, they can't conclude it changed the outcome of the 2016 election.

"We have no way of gauging the impact it had on the choices the electorate made," said Clapper, a blunt-spoken veteran intelligence official. "There's no way for us to gauge that."

Clapper joined two other top intelligence officials at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee, the first of its kind on the question of the extent of Russian hacking — and whether Russia really was responsible.

President-elect Donald Trump has consistently belittled the judgment of Russian involvement, saying it could have been China, someone "sitting on their bed who weighs 400 pounds," or "some guy in his home in New Jersey."

On Thursday, Trump appeared to back away from his harsh judgments, saying on Twitter: "The media lies to make it look like I am against 'Intelligence' when in fact I am a big fan!"

Democrats on the panel used the hearing to defend the intelligence agencies and criticize Trump for disparaging tweets that cited statements from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who dumped the hacked Democratic emails during the campaign.

Without naming Trump, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said that dismissive remarks were "a terrible disservice to our nation, and to the very courageous men and women who put their lives at risk so this nation can be better informed."

Clapper said that while the intelligence world deserves a high level of skepticism, "there's a difference between skepticism and disparagement."

For their part, Republicans also praised U.S. intelligence but mostly stayed neutral on Trump's adversarial role in the question of Russian hacking.

One of the few to go after Trump even indirectly was Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who said the new president would need the intelligence world to help guide him through inevitable foreign crises and potential entanglements.

"Putin is up to no good and he better be stopped," Graham said. "And, Mr. President-elect, when you listen to these people you can be skeptical but understand they are the best among us and they are trying to protect us."

Clapper and two other top U.S. intelligence officials on the panel, Marcel Lettre of the Department of Defense and Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency and the U.S. Cyber Command, were unwilling to disclose any new detail about Russia's hacking of Democrats.

Officials have said the hacking ultimately was aimed at electing Trump. A report on the hacking is due next week, with a declassified version likely for public release.

Asked whether they'd been able to confirm their original assessment three months ago that Russia was interfering in the election, Clapper said intelligence officials "stand actually more resolutely on the strength of that statement" than ever before.

But under questioning from committee chairman Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Clapper said Russian hacking did not change any vote tallies.

He stopped short of agreeing that the hacking constituted an act of war, saying such a judgment was a "very heavy policy call that I don't believe the intelligence community should make."

Russia has a "long history" of interfering in elections, including their own, he said.

"But I don't think that we've ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere with our election process than we've seen in this case," Clapper said.

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, a Senate Armed Services Committee member, questioned the officials about whether the major political parties — Republican and Democratic — should be considered part of the nation's critical infrastructure, on par with the electric grid or transportation systems.

Clapper replied that Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson broached the subject with state officials but had received unspecified "pushback."

"It's a policy call," Clapper said. "Whatever additional protections that such a declaration would afford, I think that would be a good thing. But whether or not we should do that or not is really not a call for the intelligence community to make."

Gillibrand also urged the officials to spur on efforts to include the National Guard units and reservists in countering cyberattacks.

Members of the guard and reserves "have day jobs and they may be working at Google and Microsoft and Facebook and all these technology companies that have extraordinary skills," said Gillibrand. "And as a way to tap into the best of the best, I think we should look at people who already have these skills."

Rogers, the head of the NSA and the military's Cyber Command, said two such units have been created and two more are on tap for 2017, with 21 to follow that will not be directly connected to the main "mission force."

Among the units taking shape is the New York-New Jersey Army National Guard Cyber Protection Team in Latham. It has begun hiring staff, but is not yet fully operational.